Learning the Lessons of the Pandemic

Many fear that the pandemic invites national withdrawal, but the world's scientists are showing us a better way forward. They are not only putting their research at everyone’s disposal, but also modeling a cooperative way of working that enables them to produce more and better output.

MADRID – Among its many other effects, the COVID-19 crisis has intensified the pre-existing geopolitical rivalry between China and the United States. This tension has led many to warn of the “Thucydides trap,” a term coined by Harvard’s Graham T. Allison to refer to the heightened risk of conflict when an emerging power threatens to displace an established one. Allison’s theory takes its name from the ancient Greek historian Thucydides’ chronicle of the Peloponnesian War, in which Sparta defeated the rising city-state of Athens.

One important detail of this historical touchstone has passed largely unnoticed, however, even amid the ongoing pandemic: the determining factor in Sparta’s victory was a plague that killed about one-third of Athens’s population, including Pericles, the city’s leader.

Yale’s Frank M. Snowden argues that while military and political events may prevail in public memory, pandemics have played a preponderant role in great historical changes. For example, it was typhus that cut short Napoleon’s 1812 invasion of Russia, while the 1918-19 flu is thought to have diminished US President Woodrow Wilson’s abilities during the Treaty of Versailles negotiations.

Before COVID-19, however, Western societies had largely forgotten how much structural harm a disease can cause – even though cholera and malaria epidemics are currently ravaging the poorest parts of the world, and global AIDS and swine flu pandemics have killed many in recent decades.

Scientists had been warning us for years of an imminent pandemic of a respiratory virus equal in severity to the 1918-19 flu, yet we were insufficiently prepared to contain the spread of the new coronavirus. That was mainly due to the initial heedlessness shown by leaders in advanced economies, combined with developing countries’ chronic vulnerability, which overshadows their greater experience in managing epidemics.

Although the coronavirus is having an impact across the board, owing to its virulence and the virtually unprecedented shutdown of much of the global economy, it is undoubtedly aggravating pre-existing social inequalities within and among countries.

Subscribe to Project Syndicate

Enjoy unlimited access to the ideas and opinions of the world's leading thinkers, including weekly long reads, book reviews, and interviews; The Year Ahead annual print magazine; the complete PS archive; and more – all for less than $2 a week.

Subscribe Now

Every day, health workers and others with essential jobs risk infection, often without adequate protection, and for wages that do not reflect the fundamental value of their effort. Likewise, many sectors particularly affected by economic lockdowns face an uncertain future. And the challenge is even greater in middle- or low-income countries, owing to their meager fiscal capacity, large informal economies, precarious health-care systems, and deficient sanitation.

For all of these reasons, the severity of the current circumstances compels us to redesign our social contracts. In developed countries, where neglect of the real economy has allowed inequalities to erode social cohesion, the most urgent priority is to protect workers in essential sectors adequately and compensate them materially – and not just with applause, albeit well-deserved – for their contribution to our wellbeing. In order to ensure a broad-based economic recovery, we must provide a minimum safety net for all those who have lost their jobs because of COVID-19.

Nor, of course, can less prosperous countries be forgotten. That means alleviating their debt burden, helping them to obtain medicines and medical supplies on equal terms, and guaranteeing their access to a COVID-19 vaccine when it becomes available.

An effective social contract must consider the global context, and an effective global focus must take account of climate change. The Earth is humankind’s most important common possession, yet it, too, has been affected by the root cause of the COVID-19 crisis: our collective blindness.

Just as we probably would have controlled the coronavirus outbreak faster and more effectively had we listened to the epidemiologists, we still have time to combat global warming before we pass the point of no return. Nevertheless, that will happen only if we listen to the warnings of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and act without delay.

After all, it is not certain that the reduction of greenhouse-gas emissions brought about by the economic shutdown, even if it were sustained, would be enough to meet the objectives of the Paris climate agreement. In fact, overproduction linked to economic reopening risks raising emissions to pre-crisis levels, as recently happened in China.

To avoid catastrophe, therefore, we must act immediately and firmly: we can limit global warming to 1.5º Celsius above pre-industrial levels only through ambitious and coordinated collective action, led by governments and complemented by the private sector. For instance, we should take climate change into account in designing every economic stimulus package, in order to guarantee their long-term feasibility.

Despite the magnitude of the challenge, a few things are working in our favor. Throughout the pandemic, in contrast to other systemic shocks like war, physical infrastructure remains intact and – the health situation allowing – can be reactivated easily. Moreover, the fight against the virus has brought about unprecedented global scientific collaboration, including through the rapid sequencing and diffusion of the virus’s genome by Chinese scientists, as well as the publication of hundreds of new studies every day.

The multiple public and private initiatives to develop a vaccine should be commended, too. These efforts will, one hopes, continue and not focus solely on the coronavirus: in 2018 alone, more than a half-million people worldwide died of malaria or cholera.

While many fear that the pandemic calls for national retreat, the world’s scientists are showing us the best way forward. They are not only putting their research at everyone’s disposal, but also modeling a cooperative way of working that enables them to do more and do it better. All countries, starting with the two leading global powers, should follow this example and recognize their irrevocable mutual dependence. What is at stake is no less than the future of the planet and our own survival.

Support High-Quality Commentary

For more than 25 years, Project Syndicate has been guided by a simple credo: All people deserve access to a broad range of views by the world's foremost leaders and thinkers on the issues, events, and forces shaping their lives. At a time of unprecedented uncertainty, that mission is more important than ever – and we remain committed to fulfilling it.

But there is no doubt that we, like so many other media organizations nowadays, are under growing strain. If you are in a position to support us, please subscribe now.

As a subscriber, you will enjoy unlimited access to our On Point suite of long reads and book reviews, Say More contributor interviews, The Year Ahead magazine, the full PS archive, and much more. You will also directly support our mission of delivering the highest-quality commentary on the world's most pressing issues to as wide an audience as possible.

By helping us to build a truly open world of ideas, every PS subscriber makes a real difference. Thank you.

Javier Solana, a former EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Secretary-General of NATO, and Foreign Minister of Spain, is currently President of the Esade Center for Global Economy and Geopolitics and Distinguished Fellow at the Brookings Institution.

I don't understand how a pandemic is supposed to relate to a 'Thuycidides trap'. The Athens plague was a consequence of the Spartan siege. Napolean's army in Russia suffered typhus because it was retreating under adverse conditions inflicted by 'General January' and 'General February'. Spanish flu had no effect whatsoever on the balance of power at the end of the First World War. Wilson's diplomacy would have failed even if he had been in the pink of health. Why? The Allies were not prepared to occupy Germany till it paid reparations because of the risk of the Bolshevik contagion spreading. France did not develop an offensive military doctrine and thus a second conflict was inevitable.

No doubt, Trump and Biden are going to compete on who looks tougher on China- as the scapegoat for this. But if there is a Thuycidides trap here only China can fall into it because only China has invested heavily in an expansionary infrastructure scheme whose financial viability is a function of global supply chains becoming more, not less, China focal.

Endemic diseases have always had 'structural' effects. Their elimination removed a Malthusian check on population over large swathes of territory.

The introduction of a new disease by invaders can cause massive demographic replacement. But those days are long over. The fact is pandemics don't matter very much. They are an 'exogenous shock' which have few hysteresis effects. Hong Kong flu killed a million people at the end of the Sixties. Older British people may remember that the Post was disrupted- something which has not happened this time round. There was pre-existing immunity from a similar outbreak in the Fifties. According to Jeremy Hunt, the poor British response was because SAGE assumed this was a flu variant not something novel. Had the vulnerability associated with Care Homes been identified and dealt with, mortality rates would have been less than with Hong Kong flu.

International Scientific bodies considered the US and UK to be very well prepared for a pandemic according to a study published just last year. But scientists can make mistakes. It is foolish to blame political leaders for mistakes made by scientists embedded in the bureaucracy. It is mere populist virtue signalling to speak primly of 'social inequality'- this is exacerbated only if Society decides to protect vulnerable, mainly older, people at the expense of the livelihoods of younger, generally poorer, workers. But this is a generational matter not a story about evil oligarchs.

We all feel grateful to low paid Health workers. However, their wages are determined by Supply and Demand. Because of greater uncertainty in similar occupations, the Supply into this sector will increase and thus wages can't go up. By contrast, if transfer earnings for those in this sector rises- which means if people with less 'human capital' can get well paid manufacturing, construction and distribution jobs- then their wages rise. Pretending there is some Social Contract which can be tinkered with for moral reasons is itself a morally repugnant activity and ought not to be rewarded by the market.

Why couple alleviating past debt- which was not incurred for any humanitarian, as opposed to corrupt, purpose- with the provision of medical and other supplies whose positive externality is greater than cost? This is foolish! It is to pretend that self-interest is actually philanthropy. It is obvious that money spent on killing off this virus in faraway places is much much more money saved on fighting the thing in our own Cities. Let us frankly say that we are being selfish and shrewd in this type of spending. Grand talk of the Earth a Mankind's common heimat obscures our rational self-interest in this matter.

The truth about this pandemic is that there was a temporary 'shock and awe' effect on expectations because of unprecedented lockdowns. But there were similar wage and price freezes in 1971- the time of the 'Nixon shock'. But Prices and Incomes policy never became a policy instrument. They worsened the disease, they were not a cure. Similarly, as the lockdown shock has worn off, we realize that nothing much has changed. In future, we are going to accept variations in mortality for vulnerable demographics just as we learnt to accept higher structural unemployment even though this supposedly broke the post-war 'Keynesian' social contract. At the beginning of the Seventies there were people who linked economic malaise to 'Silent Spring' type Environmentalism and 'Club of Rome' type pessimism. Such people may have been able to make a little money in subsequent decades but would have been better off writing about Lizard people in flying saucers conducting anal probes on all and sundry. Thanks to the internet, victims of alien abduction are able to pool scholarly resources in an unprecedented and wholly altruistic way. No doubt, they think what i at stake is no less than the future of the planet and of our own survival under conditions of recurrent probing.

New Comment

It appears that you have not yet updated your first and last name. If you would like to update your name, please do so here.

Pin comment to this paragraph

After posting your comment, you’ll have a ten-minute window to make any edits. Please note that we moderate comments to ensure the conversation remains topically relevant. We appreciate well-informed comments and welcome your criticism and insight. Please be civil and avoid name-calling and ad hominem remarks.

Mass protests over racial injustice, the COVID-19 pandemic, and a sharp economic downturn have plunged the United States into its deepest crisis in decades. Will the public embrace radical, systemic reforms, or will the specter of civil disorder provoke a conservative backlash?

For democratic countries like the United States, the COVID-19 crisis has opened up four possible political and socioeconomic trajectories. But only one path forward leads to a destination that most people would want to reach.

Log in/Register

Please log in or register to continue. Registration is free and requires only your email address.

Emailrequired

PasswordrequiredRemember me?

Please enter your email address and click on the reset-password button. If your email exists in our system, we'll send you an email with a link to reset your password. Please note that the link will expire twenty-four hours after the email is sent. If you can't find this email, please check your spam folder.